David King's "How To Beat Collingwood"

[Old Spice]

I seem to recall in, I think, Maxwells book that the club complained about St Kilda's practice of going 3rd man up at the stoppages in GF1.

The reward was that the umpire's absolutely shafted Leroy in GF 2.

I know a 3rd man can compete in around the ground stoppages, but surely your ruckman can't be climbed over and impeded in that situation? If a fellow ruck can be pinged for infringing opposition ruckmen, why can another player climb over your ruckman and impede his run at the ball?

Is it that the 3rd man can climb over their own ruck or other players, but not the ruck?

Anyone got the rule re this?

 

[sports_shooter]

Re: David King's "How to Beat Collingwood" (Part III)

Want to know how to beat Collingwood?

Run the ball your full 15, kick it long and quick and don't handball unless its from a mark to a player who can run his 15 & kick the ball long and quick.

 

[lgarth80]

Re: David King's "How to Beat Collingwood" (Part III)

Want to know how to beat Collingwood?

Run the ball your full 15, kick it long and quick and don't handball unless its from a mark to a player who can run his 15 & kick the ball long and quick.

Wasn't this the Geelong gameplan that the Press and Cluster was designed to beat!

Cats did handball but almost always to a player who ran forward and kicked long and quick up the guts.

Beating Collingwood requires winning stoppages, so you get field position. It involves kicking early goals - scoreboard pressure. It involves putting on fierce pressure once the Pies eventual inside 50s come in, so that Collingwood gets no easy shots at goal, and hence sprays too many - then take that "turnover" and maintain possession getting a rebound goal. It also involves not allowing the Magpies an extra loose defender.

To be honest, the Pies need to have a bad game from most mids, the opposition ruck needs to play well, and the opposition tall forwards need to take us apart for us to get beaten.

But...just so we don't get ahead of ourselves...the bad game from most mids did occur last season in the GF. It was lucky that the Saints didn't have enough tall forward winners to take advantage of this. It was also lucky that Gardiner got injured.

 

[rose jam]

I've always thought the 3rd man up should be banned because it effectively reduces the importance of a ruckman and makes them less valuable to the game and ultimately you start losing a body type that can play footy

 

[jonbe54]

I've always thought the 3rd man up should be banned because it effectively reduces the importance of a ruckman and makes them less valuable to the game and ultimately you start losing a body type that can play footy

Ruckmen are under threat anyway the sub rule virtually kills off second rucks which in the long run means less big guys will be attracted to the role because of fewer openings, but don't tell the AFL that or they'll spend another $1M of the clubs money to prove that having 1 less rucking position is actually good for everyone concerned and its all because of the AFL having the visionary foresight to bring in the sub rule

 

[BuckleysBrigade]

... here it comes ...

 

[mattys123]

... here it comes ...

Nah, nothing new, Kingy just thinks the 3rd man up in the ruck option has ruined Luke Ball for the year, and that Collingwood are in big trouble.

Onya Kingy, don't let us down, come up with something new after we only win by 78 points this week.

 

[rose jam]

haha, stupid Kinghead. Oooohhh 3rd man up, scary stuff, that's new, never seen that before.

Idiot

 

[KissmeRobbo]

Coach has to get emotionally involved with his body language.. he's a genius

 

[rose jam]

and the funniest thing was they showed about 10 around the ground ruck contests and none of them were 3rd man up! what the hell! Can't take these jokers semi-seriously

 

[FredNerk69]

The guy is a complete and utter d-head. The only time I will believe we give this tactic any credence whatsoever is when we practice against it at training.

Good luck Hawthorn it worked really well for you earlier in the year when you got smashed by 10 goals.

 

[Mobbsy]

King is such a spud.

Collingwood are concerned.
Takes away Luke Balls game.
Hawks are best at it.

what.is.he.doing.in.media.as.an.analyst.

Smarmy toolbox

 

[Number 10]

and the funniest thing was they showed about 10 around the ground ruck contests and none of them were 3rd man up! what the hell! Can't take these jokers semi-seriously

That's what I was thinking....

 

[damuzzdu]

Clearly Collingwood watch #afl360 and David King as it has now dropped Luke Ball after Kingy said on Wednesday nite that the way to beat Collingwood is with "3rd man up" and with it take away Luke Ball influence.

Seems Lukey wont get a game during the finals

 

[ipswichpies]

He is just another bloke who cannot stand the thought of Magpie success why does he not talk about how to beat Carlton,Hawthorn or the Geelong or anybody else for that matter.It just shows his agenda and his bias.

 

[Bay Pie]

If the 3rd man up destroyed Bally's game, wouldn't it do the same to Sam Mitchell, Brad Sewell, Joel Selwood and Matt Priddis. Aren't they all inside extractors?

 

[damuzzdu]

Can't wait for Wednesday evening.

Should go something like this....

GW - "Kingy i understand you wanna discuss Collingwood"

DK - "Yes Gerard. I have found Collingwood weakness. It is their last qtrs. They are failing badly to run out the last qtr. Will be very vulnerable to quality sides that run out that final qtr, like Hawthorn, Geelong, Carlton"

The others all nod...saying "Well done Kingy"

DK - "Add that to the 3rd man up, the chip-chip-chip game like Hawthorn, have small running forwards like Carlton and Collingwood have serious issues coming into finals"

 

[rose jam]

DK - "Add that to the 3rd man up, the chip-chip-chip game like Hawthorn, have small running forwards like Carlton and Collingwood have serious issues coming into finals"

seriously the craziest one is Kingy and the Hawthorn game plan - "it's been built specifically to defeat Collingwood. By kicking it 20 times to get it into the forward line it denies Collingwood the ball". Hahahah, hilarious when that blew up in his face and he had to sweat on the next team to get within 5 goals to come up with something.

When's the guy gonna sit back and go, "you know Pies just have a lot more good players than anyone else"

 

[Ed D]

When's the guy gonna sit back and go, "you know Pies just have a lot more good players than anyone else"

He'd probably have nothing to talk about and would be out of a job. I wouldn't be surprised if deep down he knows what he's talking about is just hypothetical crap.

 

[Quicky]

No bites tonight so far. All he said was Geelong will not win the premiership. Strange after we were convincingly beaten for the first time this year.

 

[Ed D]

Did he do a "how to beat Geelong" insight?

 

[mattys123]

Did he do a "how to beat Geelong" insight?

Strangely no, he simply said "they can't win it", which was weird.

Mark McClure almost jizzed when talking about us losing this week though, that was even weirder, although maybe the weirdest part was that he actually believed we are going to lose this week.

 

[Quicky]

Did he do a "how to beat Geelong" insight?

Does he do that too? I wasn't watching all that closely but their opinion was that in the big finals Mooney was a must at CHF. That they lacked someone for the "Mooney role". Funny yeah. Mooney for the Mooney role. Genius shit right there. But yeah it's his opinion they can't win the premiership. I'd say we are the only two real contenders.

 

[rose jam]

Yeah no theory tonight. Thought he might go with the "kick it long, lock it in" sheite. But he was actually smart enough to admit round 24 is a crock of crockness in the crock hole

 

[Ed D]

I reckon he had a week on the piss and never came up with a new theory.